Comments on: Gay foes move to halt Maine gay marriage law

By: Sunshine

Sunshine — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:50:11 +0000

I hope that Maine has the same kind of disclosure laws that other States do for petitions.

Those laws require the disclosure of the names of the voters who signed the petition.

Everyone who signs the petition supporting a referendum overturning this law should be published as soon as it is available in order to uphold the integrity of the election process.

By: LOrion

LOrion — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:34:16 +0000

Hey, I am with Jessi too. Now I am sure there is some law against it, but they would have to catch you!

By: David Currier

David Currier — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:53:37 +0000

Frankly, I think Jessi’s idea of grabbing Pen and Petitions with names is the funniest act of civil disobedience that I can think of. Go, Jessi!!

By: David Currier

David Currier — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:49:45 +0000

I grew up in Maine. Spent 26 tortured years there as a gay man, knowing since the 3rd grade that I liked boys – sexually. I am so proud of my home state joining in on Equal Rights for all citizens.

Work hard folks. Don’t let those narrowminded, bible thumpers win this battle.

By: drewski

drewski — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:22:28 +0000

We need to be advertising in Maine NOW. Keep reminding people that no church is forced to act against its doctrine. It may be enough to stave off a referendum. If it does come to a referendum, we can still win. The wingnuts wouldn’t be so hysterical if they were acting from a position of power. They know support is building for marriage equality. They know people are getting tired of using the legal system to create obstacles for and discrimination against a segment of the population. They’re losing and we’re winning.

By: Jaeger; Lexington, KY

Jaeger; Lexington, KY — Fri, 08 May 2009 10:06:05 +0000

Maine Republican Sen. Debra Plowman of Hampden argued that the bill was being passed “at the expense of the people of faith.” In as much as the new marriage equality law does not force “people of faith” — or anyone else — into same-sex marriage, her argument is specious and divisive.

To the contrary, it is Ms. Plowman and her bigoted “people of faith,” seeking to force everyone into opposite-sex marriage at the expense of fairness and of equal protection under the law, who are the enemies of freedom and justice in this Land of Freedom and Justice for All.

By: shawn

shawn — Fri, 08 May 2009 08:34:49 +0000

Oh wonderful! Now our Civil Rights are up for grabs by backwater, inbred central northern mainers! LMAO!

By: Douglas in Canada

Douglas in Canada — Fri, 08 May 2009 03:35:19 +0000

Sure, it’s fine if a region benefits financially from Equal Marriage. But don’t let that influence your thinking. This is not a financial issue; it’s a human rights issue.

It is dangerous to start people thinking that the only reason any region would want to support Equal Marriage is because it will bring in money. With that kind of logic, the equal acceptance of ANY group of people becomes measured by how much revenue they generate, and that is not good.

The laws should read: “regardless of sex, gender, race, sexual orientation, ability/disability, financial status, education, etc.” That is human rights.

When the law says: “based on the amount of revenue your minority will bring in…” then we’re screwed royally.

By: MoJonson

MoJonson — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:09:02 +0000

So, is there a hold placed on same-gender marriage? I’m disappointed that this very important piece of information was not covered in this article.

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:10:35 +0000

From the article:
“The study, by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, shows that by allowing same-sex couples to marry in Maine, the state budget will experience a boost of approximately $8 million per year.

The impact would be the result of an increase in state income and sales tax revenue as well as savings in expenditures on state means-tested public benefit programs the institute said.”

I think it ironic that after Prop 8 passed here in California, the governor two days after the election, stated that the state was in financial trouble. And the state still is in trouble.

If Prop 8 had failed, I’m not saying that the state would be in a better financial position, however, it would have greatly benefited the state’s coffers. After all, over 18,000 people got married in the 5 months it was legal, which bought in a lot of revenue to the state in the form of taxes. Even the marriage certificate, which in my area is $68.00, brought in over $1 million. Not to mention jobs, such as wedding planners, photographers, florists, etc. Where are they now? Most are unemployed.

What’s wrong with this picture?